Adopting The Right UX Perspective

Adopting The Right UX Perspective

UX is about just that, user experience. Not software design, but the experience that the user feels. While watching a promotional video for a new calendar app, Peek, I just realized my perspective on UX was too software centric.

About 38 seconds into this video, the girl taps on an item (the hour picker), to go into a submenu (choose which hour of the day). Instead of two separate taps on two screens, Peek implemented a tap and hold, follow by a slide across the screen the desired location, and release.

This UX model of tap, hold, slide, and release (THSR)  won't work in many places. In this case, the THSR model works because the submenu has a few unique characteristics:

1) Simple menu with a fixed number of easily understood choices
2) Frequently used (by a heavy calendar user)
3) Is a "one and done" list

As I've thought about software designs that I interact with, I've usually thought in terms of taps and swipes. Peek demonstrates that my frame of reference didn't capture the subtleties of how the user actually interacts with the app. I should have been thinking in terms of touches and removals. A tap is a touch and a removal.

Had I been responsible for designing the UX in Peek, I would likely have implemented the following:

tap
remove
move finger to new screen location
tap
remove

Peek implemented:

tap
move finger to new screen location
remove

Genius. Peek removed 2 steps from a 5 step process.

Moral of the story: in UX, break everything down into the most granular steps possible. Rather than thinking about the design of the software, think about each physical and mental process the user must walk through in order to derive value from the software.

The Pristine Story: Pivot. Revenue!

Since the last episode of the Pristine Story, we pivoted and hit our most important milestone to date: revenue! We are increasingly focusing on mobile healthcare settings such as the ER, emergency response, and wound care. We deployed EyeSight with our first partner, Wound Care Advantage (WCA), to power telemedicine wound care consults between hospitals and outpatient wound care centers. The deployment went smoothly. This quote from Pete, IT Director at WCA sums up our experiences:

"You all came out and it just worked. I've seen smoke and mirrors, but your presentation was superb. I can tell when I'm being sold smoke and mirrors. But it just worked. You guys came out and said it, and then did it, instead of selling it. It was awesome."

We are incredibly excited about our partnership with WCA. We'll be working with them to roll out EyeSight across their client base. Our development and training teams have been working around the clock for the last few weeks to ensure seamless deployments. Thank you team.

Pristine will be at the annual HIMSS Conference, Feb 23 - 27 in Orlando, FL. We'll be in the Startup Showcase in Hall E at Booth 7293. We'll be running live demos, so please come by and say hello!

New Website

We revamped our website to reflect a pivot in our market strategy. And as a new year's resolution, one of our mobile developers, Aaron, started the Pristine Engineering Blog, an outlet for our engineers to discuss how we solve problems at Pristine. Please check out our new website and blog and let us know what you think. We would love to hear your feedback.

Team Growth

We'd like to welcome aboard our newest member of the team, Brett Hogan, who's working with Devin to lead our client success stories. Brett has been at Accenture for the last 5 years working exclusively in health IT. With Brett aboard, we now have 10 FTEs.

Of course, we're still hiring. We're looking for more project manager/trainers to work in client success, outside sales(wo)men, a product marketing manager, an iOS/Android mobile developer, and an operations engineer to manage our cloud deployments. You can apply at our new careers site.

Blogging and Wrap Up

I recently started writing for EMRandHIPAA, one of the largest health IT publications on the web, where I'll continue to write at my sweet spot: the intersection of healthcare, technology, economics, business models, and policy. I'm thrilled to get my writing in front of more people than ever before, and to work closely with John Lynn, the founder of EMRandHIPAA.

My opening post for EMRandHIPAA - How Much Of The Healthcare Business Is Healthcare? - is one of the best I've ever written. Check it out, leave a comment, and provide feedback. Nothing makes my day like hearing good things about my writing (other than Pristine's success). 

Why Will Medical Professionals Use Laptops?

This post was originally featured on EMRandHIPAA.

Steve Jobs famously said that “laptops are like trucks. They’re going to be used by fewer and fewer people. This transition is going to make people uneasy.”

Are medical professionals truck drivers or bike riders?

We have witnessed truck drivers turn into bike riders in almost every computing context:

Big businesses used to buy mainframes. Then they replaced mainframes with mini computers. Then they replaced minicomputers with desktops and servers. Small businesses began adopting technology in meaningful ways once they could deploy a local server and clients at reasonable cost inside their businesses. As web technologies exploded and mobile devices became increasingly prevalent, large numbers of mobile professionals began traveling with laptops, tablets and smartphones. Over the past few years, many have even stopped traveling with laptops; now they travel with just a tablet and smartphone.

Consumers have been just as fickle, if not more so. They adopted build-it-yourself computers, then Apple IIs, then mid tower desktops, then laptops, then ultra-light laptops, and now smartphones and tablets.

Mobile is the most under-hyped trend in technology. Mobile devices – smartphones, tablets, and soon, wearables – are occupying an increasingly larger percentage of total computing time. Although mobile devices tend to have smaller screens and fewer robust input methods relative to traditional PCs (see why the keyboard and mouse are the most efficient input methods), mobile devices are often preferred because users value ease of use, mobility, and access more than raw efficiency.

The EMR is still widely conceived of as a desktop-app with a mobile add-on. A few EMR companies, such as Dr Chrono, are mobile-first. But even in 2014, the vast majority of EMR companies are not mobile-first. The legacy holdouts cite battery, screen size, and lack of a keyboard as reasons why mobile won’t eat healthcare. Let’s consider each of the primary constraints and the innovations happening along each front:

Battery – Unlike every other computing component, batteries are the only component that aren’t doubling in performance every 2-5 years. Battery density continues to improve at a measly 1-2% per year. The battery challenge will be overcome through a few means: huge breakthroughs in battery density, and increasing efficiency in all battery-hungry components: screens and CPUs. We are on the verge of the transition to OLED screens, which will drive an enormous improvement in energy efficiency in screens. Mobile CPUs are also about to undergo a shift as OEM’s values change: mobile CPUs have become good enough that the majority of future CPU improvements will emphasize battery performance rather than increased compute performance.

Lack of a keyboard – Virtual keyboards will never offer the speed of physical keyboards. The laggards miss the point that providers won’t have to type as much. NLP is finally allowing people to speak freely. The problem with keyboards aren’t the characteristics of the keyboard, but rather the existential presence of the keyboard itself. Through a combination of voice, natural-language-processing, and scribes, doctors will type less and yet document more than ever before. I’m friends with CEOs of at least half a dozen companies attempting to solve this problem across a number of dimensions. Given how challenging and fragmented the technology problem is, I suspect we won’t see a single winner, but a variety of solutions each with unique compromises.

Screen size – We are on the verge of foldable, bendable, and curved screens. These traits will help resolve the screen size problem on touch-based devices. As eyeware devices blossom, screen size will become increasingly trivial because eyeware devices have such an enormous canvas to work with. Devices such as the MetaPro andAtheerOne will face the opposite problem: data overload. These new user interfaces can present extremely large volumes of robust data across 3 dimensions. They will mandate a complete re-thinking of presentation and user interaction with information at the point of care.

I find it nearly impossible to believe that laptops have more than a decade of life left in clinical environments. They simply do not accommodate the ergonomics of care delivery. As mobile devices catch up to PCs in terms of efficiency and perceived screen size, medical professionals will abandon laptops in droves.

This begs the question: what is the right form factor for medical professionals at the point of care?

To tackle this question in 2014 – while we’re still in the nascent years of wearables and eyeware computing – I will address the question “what software experiences should the ideal form factor enable?”

The ideal hardware* form factor of the future is:

Transparent: The hardware should melt away and the seams between hardware and software should blur. Modern tablets are quite svelte and light. There isn’t much more value to be had by improving portability of modern tablets; users simply can’t perceive the difference between .7lb and .8lb tablets. However, there is enormous opportunity for improvements in portability and accessibility when devices go handsfree.

Omni-present, yet invisible: There is way too much friction separating medical professionals from the computers that they’re interacting with all day long: physical distance (even the pocket is too far) and passwords. The ideal device of the future is friction free. It’s always there and always authenticated. In order to always be there, it must appear as if it’s not there. It must be transparent. Although Glass isn’t there just yet, Google describes the desired paradox eloquently when describing Glass: “It’s there when you need it, and out of sight when you don’t.” Eyeware devices will trend this way.

Interactive: despite their efficiency, PC interfaces are remarkably un-interactive. Almost all interaction boils down to a click on a pixel location or a keyboard command. Interacting with healthcare information in the future will be diverse and rich: natural physical movements, subtle winks, voice, and vision will all play significant roles. Although these interactions will require some learning (and un-learning of bad behaviors) for existing staff, new staff will pick them up and never look back.

Robust: Mobile devices of the future must be able to keep up with medical professionals. The devices must have shift-long battery life and be able to display large volumes of complex information at a glance.

Secure: This is a given. But I’ll emphasize this is as physical security becomes increasingly important in light of the number of unencrypted hospital laptops being stolen or lost.

Support 3rd party communications: As medicine becomes increasingly complex, specialized, and team-based, medical professionals will share even more information with one another, patients, and their families. Medical professionals will need a device that supports sharing what they’re seeing and interacting with.

I’m fairly convinced (and to be fair, highly biased as CEO of a Glass-centric company) that eyeware devices will define the future of computer interaction at the point of care. Eyeware devices have the potential to exceed tablets, smartphones, watches, jewelry, and laptops across every dimension above, except perhaps 3rd party communication. Eyeware devices are intrinsically personal, and don’t accommodate others’ prying eyes. If this turns out to be a major detriment, I suspect the problem will be solved through software to share what you’re seeing.

What do you think? What is the ideal form factor at the point of care?

*Software tends to dominate most health IT discussions; however, this blog post is focused on ergonomics of hardware form factors. As such, this list avoids software-centric traits such as context, intelligence, intuition, etc.

Unlocking The Power Of Data Science In Healthcare

This post was originally featured on EMRandHIPAA.

Vinod Khosla, Founder of Sun Microsystems and Khosla Ventures, recently stated that “in the next 10 years, data science and software will do more for medicine than all of the biological sciences together.”

The rise of population health and healthcare analytics companies aligns with Khosla’s claim. There are hordes of companies implementing healthcare analytics and helping providers identify at-risk populations to engage in proactive care. Despite their efforts, most of the analytics companies have been struggling to help providers actually improve outcomes.

Why?

Because data science in and of itself is meaningless. Effective data science can only provide insights. The challenge is in acting on insights provided by data. This is a widely acknowledged problem that every data science / analytics company faces; this problem has been particularly difficult in healthcare where a backwards culture and incentive structure have skewed the system towards complacency and volume rather than proactive care and value.

In healthcare, the actionability and effectiveness of data science hinge on communication between providers and patients, and on patients’ ability to act on those insights. There are a few methods of provider-to-patient communication and actionability:

At the point of care (in person or virtual visit) – providers have been educating patients at the point of care since the dawn of the profession. With advanced data analytics, providers can give more accurate, more customized education during the encounter. But the problem is that patients must act on that information at home when the doctor isn’t looking over the patient’s shoulder. Patients consistently fail to do what providers have asked them to do. The problem here is that the patient education and actionability based on education are intermediated by time and (lack of) context. Patients simply forget or are unwilling to do what their providers ask them to do in order to better care for themselves. Patients aren’t being educated in the right context. Point of care education won’t encourage patients from smoking the next cigarette, taking their meds on time, or skipping cheesecake at the office party.

Patient portals – the federal government has mandated that providers enable patients to engage with providers via patient portals. The basic premise of this mandate is that with access to their own health information, patients will take better care of themselves. Patient portals have some potential to empower patients to learn about their conditions at home and investigate conditions in more depth, but they don’t solve the context problem. Patient portals won’t do anything to help patients order a salad instead of a hamburger.

Messaging and notifications – this is the least explored, least understood, and in my opinion, the most potent communication channel to impact patient behavior. Automated notifications on iOS and Android can be presented contextually provided the device has contextual data to present notifications. Context is king. We live in the age of context. As devices learn more about their owners, devices can present contextual information to help change behavior. If your smartphone (or Google Glass, Jawbone, iWatch, etc) knows that you’re about to smoke a cigarette, it can automatically connect you with your husband/wife so that they can yell at you. If your device knows that you’re out at a steakhouse for dinner with business guests, it can remind you to order grilled chicken instead of a fried steak. The number of opportunities are endless.

To provide a better sense of the power of context, let’s examine Google and Facebook ads. Facebook ads are anything but contextual. When I’m scrolling through my news feed, I don’t care about the latest Hobbit movie, some new workout shake, or Dell’s newest laptop. I logged into Facebook to check out what my friends are up to, not to learn about the Hobbit or a laptop.

But when I Google “flight from Austin to New York January 18th” there’s a huge probability that I’m already committed to spending several hundred dollars to fly to New York, get a hotel, and spend money in NYC. With that search, only relevant advertisers – airlines, taxis, hotels, and local NYC attractions – will bid for my attention; I’m not going to see an ad for The Hobbit when searching for for a trip to NY.

This sense of context is reflected in Facebook and Google’s click through rates (CTR). 1-3% of all Google searches result in the user clicking on an ad. Between .01-.3% of FaceBook ads are clicked on. Google is measurably 10-100x more effective than Facebook. That’s the power of context.

There’s nothing wrong with emailing patients PDFs and interactive digital education tools after an encounter; there’s nothing wrong with patient portals and BlueButton. All of these communication channels fall short in that they don’t take advantage of real-time two way contextual communications. All of these channels are intrinsically one-way and lack context.

Books were the the first few-to-many communication channel. Then newspapers and magazines. Then radios. Then movies and TV. The defining characteristic of the Internet is that it is the first to enable two-way, many-to-many communications. The federal government’s healthcare communication model is fundamentally based on 20th century communication strategies. The power of data science will drive meaningful changes in patient behavior only when communication strategies leverage 21st century communication models.

Do You Happen To Life Or Does Life Happen To You?

I've been interviewing a lot of people as Pristine continues to grow. I used to refrain from looking for a single theme across all candidates for all positions. A single theme or trait across all candidates cynically implies that candidates can be categorized as either yes or no. And that means there is a binary reality to what we're looking for:

Do you happen to life, or does life happen to you?

I haven't found a single-word adjective that encapsulates this notion, though terms such as "cohesion" and "story" are acceptable approximations.

To really understand the meaning of this question, I'll provide a brief anecdote of the interviewee that brought this notion to mind. We'll call the candidate Bob to maintain anonymity.

Bob found Pristine through Indeed. Bob has deployed over a dozen health IT solutions in the past decade. He knows electronic medical records, radiology imaging, inpatient billing, and telemedicine extremely well. By most accounts, Bob should be able to lead Pristine deployments in hospitals.

I pressed him to understand why he moved from company to company (he wasn't a 3-month job hopper) over the last decade. His answer was always something along the lines of "this new opportunity landed in front of me, and I thought to myself, why not?"

I have no problem with wanting to explore and try new things. I encourage all Pristine employees to explore their curiosity. I don't have a problem with the fact that Bob left his former roles because he was bored. I encourage all Pristine employees to leave when the join if they aren't learning.

We didn't hire Bob. Although he probably would have done a reasonable job, Bob would never excel at Pristine. Why? Excellence doesn't happen by chance. Although Bob is a reasonably intelligent person with relevant experience to our business, Bob never demonstrated excellence, and more importantly, the potential to exhibit excellence. The current of life carried Bob downstream. Bob never fought the current.

On the other hand, if Bob were a person that "happens to life," his response to my questions about why he moved through multiple companies would have been something along the lines of "Although Acme Corporation was growing and I was doing well there, I craved something more. I knew that I wanted to grow my career, so I picked up programming on the side, built a few websites, and learned SQL over the course of 6 months. After learning all of that, I spent 4 months looking and turned down 3 job offers before joining Acme2 corporation. The entire process of getting ready to leave Acme corporation took almost a year."

Nothing about this hypothetical scenario implies that Bob is an exceptionally talented individual. But the paragraph above implies that Bob can, with time and focus, become exceptional at something. It implies that Bob can resist the current of life.

Our team at Pristine is rather young. Some of us have done exceptional things. Others haven't -- yet. I have no doubt that all of us will. If Pristine takes off in a major way, our team will develop some exceptional traits and abilities here. If Pristine doesn't take off, they will develop those traits elsewhere.

All good stories have a sense of purpose, which is derived from a flow. Stories have introductions, ebbs and flows, a protagonist, a series of challenges, and a conclusion: how did you end up here in front of Pristine?

If you come in to interview at Pristine, please be prepared tell us your story.